Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Professional_Toe_285 t1_j6lji92 wrote

Reply to comment by might-be-your-daddy in The last hour of Cast Away is devastating and beautiful by PastMiddleAge

I've watched a lot of these videos with these fan theories and it's a lot of projecting.

They're kind of toxic and makes me to believe a lot of them have trust issues with women.

38

ERSTF t1_j6lwupw wrote

Yeah. It's projecting. At no moment had I thought that she was about to leave him. There's a lot in the movie to prove otherwise. Giving a family heirloom to someone you are about to dump? Come on. Plus, after 4 years she kept so many things from Chuck. It can't be guilt, because you can feel guilty because someone you were going to dump vanishes, but after a year you kind of forget. But holding on to the Grand Cherokee, the towels and remembering what type of milk he liked with his coffee is not something you hold on to out of guilt.

44

You_Dont_Party t1_j6n8m03 wrote

I think the milk thing was a subtle reference to him being a bit on the heavier side before too.

−2

devnop t1_j6mefba wrote

To put the shoe on the other foot, I'd say calling it projection is to not respect women's needs or see the emotions presented in front of you.

Chuck was a workaholic not present in the relationship. When he called, he would talk about work and about himself. Kelly seemed sad. That slow stare then smile when photocopying seemed like hard work. When together, Chuck fell asleep during the movie. When at the Christmas meal, she again looked really sad. He'd been dragging ass on marrying her and when giving her the "gag" gift of a pager, she didn't seem surprised. When given the "not open in the car" present, she seemed more horrified than happy and her first reaction is to shake her head. Essentially proposing and immediately leaving without an answer is quite the red flag... who would do that?

It's the sort of relationship where when the woman finally says it's over, the man says "but I thought everything was great?!" because he was so self-absorbed. The confounding factor is Hanks, he's just so lovably affable we naturally forgive him anything but if it was a less likeable actor it would be less ambiguous.

edit: if you read the script it's even more overt. Kelly straight up says to Chuck "This isn't working out" and the direction is "This is not a happy woman he is leaving behind.". The last thing she says is "Chuck, you're breaking my heart" .

15

tofudisan t1_j6mu0c1 wrote

People down voting must not have seen the edit

3

staedtler2018 t1_j6mp3f9 wrote

It's projection because it's a movie. It's not real.

The movie is about a guy who does not appreciate life. This lack of appreciation for life almost literally costs him his own life. He survives, and is reborn, but he nonetheless figuratively loses his past life, because people had to move on. That is the tragic element of it.

If Helen Hunt was going to dump him because he was a workaholic then there's no need for the movie at all!

1

tofudisan t1_j6mvhgb wrote

Except for the movie setting up all the stuff about Chuck's life so that he appreciates what he lost.

Also the comment is right. Read the script https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://cemp.ac.uk/scriptzone/script.php%3Ftype%3Ddownload%26id%3D122&ved=2ahUKEwjzvMzw9PH8AhVtPkQIHfZMCAIQFnoECBAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3SgrC9aHhSeTYv5__h4v2_

10

staedtler2018 t1_j6nsjgj wrote

The script is not the movie. The movie is the movie.

The emotional climax of the movie is when Chuck and Kelly declare their love for each other in the rain. Kelly tells him she never truly lost hope that he was alive, that he's the love of her life, that she loves him, but in the end she can't leave her family. In Chuck's words, she "has to go home." It's a heartbreaking scene. And it only works because it's real: they really do love each other.

That scene is not in the script. Neither is the previous scene where Kelly can't bear to meet Chuck and cries by her car, which Chuck is able to see through the window. Instead, Kelly shows up, talks to Chuck with other people around, and is totally fine. The scene is lighthearted, even. They joke around a bunch. Then she goes back to Memphis. She never declares him the love of her life or anything of the sort.

It's clearly not the same relationship as in the movie.

The way it is presented in the movie makes more sense dramatically. All the movie is doing is switching the consequences of the main character's attitudes from real ones (losing out on friends and family because their feelings about you change) to movie ones (losing out on friends and family because you are stuck in a desert island and they think you are dead). It is unnecessary to have both the real and movie consequences, it is redundant.

Yes, of course, in "reality" Chuck would get dumped. That is what happens here, just in "movie" form (he gets dumped into a deserted island).

5

devnop t1_j6pe4jy wrote

> And it only works because it's real: they really do love each other.

Oh Kelly absolutely does love Chuck so it still all fits. Kelly is in pain with pre-crash Chuck's behaviour because she loves him. As adults we learn that love isn't enough for a relationship to work. The theme isn't simply loss but loss of what we have taken for granted. The reason behind the workaholism and the struggling relationship is to establish how he is taking for granted what he loves most.

Some movies just diverge from the themes of the shopped script wholesale but more often scripts state themes explicitly that are treated more subtly in the final movie. The screenwriter communicates by direct dialogue what the final movie shows through performances and direction. Lines that are too on the nose don't make the final cut - directors like ambiguity that tickle a viewer's brain and add depth instead of saying it out loud. They want to puzzle and provoke a viewer.

In the script the message of the story is spelled out explicitly, Chuck's island experience changes him such that he promises to live life better and not be so whipped up in work that he takes people for granted (Kelly). In the movie, there is no grand speech from Chuck about a new enlightened spirit. We can see he is a changed man but it's left up to us to try and understand how. The movie doesn't just paint the message on a sail like the script lol but gives scope for us to find our own meanings.

For me, it's pretty clear it's a similar message as the script. Chuck was living in a self-absorbed bubble and wasn't really connecting with anyone but this bubble is thoroughly popped by his experiences. One particularly nice contrast is how pre-crash Chuck's ebullient ChuckMode attitude misfires with his colleague about his cancer stricken wife (and he doesn't see it) but post-crash, he is more empathetic and connects. The whole Wilson relationship was about the need for connection. The ending is playful mix of Chuck still doing the work (delivering a fedex package) but after he realises who the package is for, stood in the crossroads, I feel confident Chuck is not going to strap on the beeper and chase delivery times again but will now pursue connection.

2